I have a question about the ORAKO. I have a IIIc but I purchased the one that is designed for the IIIf/g, I think. However, if I reverse it it fits ok on the rangefinder side of the camera. Does this make sense? I have seen them position on either of the rangefinder "windows". To those who use them regularly, can you exchange them from window to window wil the same results? Does this make sense?

I have a question about the ORAKO. I have a IIIc but I purchased the one that is designed for the IIIf/g, I think. However, if I reverse it it fits ok on the rangefinder side of the camera. Does this make sense? I have seen them position on either of the rangefinder "windows". To those who use them regularly, can you exchange them from window to window wil the same results? Does this make sense?

Richard
The IIIc & IIIf rangefinder & viefinder windows have identical diameters- so the OKARO should fit them all, though strictly the OKARO should go on the RF window.
Fitting to the RF window gives you an orange RF view with a clearer central patch; fitting to the VF window gives you an orangey central spot while the rest of the field is clear.
personally I find that the orthodox fit (over RF window) gives the best RF contrast & is probably more secure. But I think the best long-term solution for a fading RF patch is to replace the beam splitter & have the whole RF assembly cleaned at the same time.
Cheers
David

Richard
The IIIc & IIIf rangefinder & viefinder windows have identical diameters- so the OKARO should fit them all, though strictly the OKARO should go on the RF window.
Fitting to the RF window gives you an orange RF view with a clearer central patch; fitting to the VF window gives you an orangey central spot while the rest of the field is clear.
personally I find that the orthodox fit (over RF window) gives the best RF contrast & is probably more secure. But I think the best long-term solution for a fading RF patch is to replace the beam splitter & have the whole RF assembly cleaned at the same time.
Cheers
David

Leica made this filter as an accessory long before RF patch's started to fade. In the beginning it was made for those who simply wanted more contrast in the rangefinder window. It is true that it is sometimes used to improve a failing patch, but this is not an absolute. A perfect patch can sometimes look better to some with the use of the filter. I for one feel this is true. The biggest drawback of this filter can be the cost. It is often referred to as the most expensive accessory per ounce that Leica has made. That is not to say that you can't find one for a reasonable price.
Art

Paul, very cool. Were you able to find it this way, or was it a project?

Hi, I wouldnt dare try something like that on a IIIg! I bought it from a seller in Venezuela and it came with the leather already. Wasnt in a good working condition when I got it so I sent it for a CLA. Works like a dream now.

I initially wanted to replace the leather with an original look a like but dropped the idea. It does look kinda cool

Hi Walker, Sorry, thats the only Leica screwmount body I have ..... for now Go get a iiig, its nice Cheers, Paul

Paul, I wish I could afford one right now but the IIIg will just have to wait a little longer.

My IIIa arrived today and it's pretty nice for being 69 years old. The body is clean, the rangefinder contrasy and appears to be properly aligned. Speeds seem OK and everything is smooth in operation. The Summar lens has something on the front element like a kid with candy on his hands may have grabbed it. It was pretty much on the whole surface so I've been working on getting it off. I have a little more to remove before I'll be happy. Other than the stuff on the lens and the normal bright marks on the chrome finish, it's a very nice example. It's obviously been in storage awhile but had a roll of Ilford FP-4+ in it. I'll develope it later and see if there's anything on it.

Paul, I wish I could afford one right now but the IIIg will just have to wait a little longer.

My IIIa arrived today and it's pretty nice for being 69 years old. The body is clean, the rangefinder contrasy and appears to be properly aligned. Speeds seem OK and everything is smooth in operation. The Summar lens has something on the front element like a kid with candy on his hands may have grabbed it.

Walker

It will be worth the wait! A IIIa and a summar is a darn good setup as well. Congrats! Hope you will be able to clean up the lens.

KMACK,
I attended a public school in the 1950's and learned how to write with a fountain pen, an old Sheaffer pen that was clear so you could see the level of the ink. But, and this is creepy, one of my favorite pens is a Lamy, red, Safari model. It is plastic and has a black nib that is made of steel. Great pen and great company, they replace the cap when it broke!

kmack---which Catholic school in the American South did you attend? I don't remember fountain pens as we were still using carving tools for writing---:-)
Paul

Notre Dame Academy in Libertlytown Maryland, a large name for a small 3 room parish school. Grades 1 thru 6 in the 2 rooms on the first floor and 7 & 8 on the second floor. It was home to the three School Sisters of Notre Dame who did all the teaching (God's own storm troopers).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Black

But, and this is creepy, one of my favorite pens is a Lamy, red, Safari model. It is plastic and has a black nib that is made of steel. Great pen and great company, they replace the cap when it broke!

Not really, like rangefinder cameras, people who use and love fountain pens will tend to end up finding and using the same type of pens, Lamy, Waterman, Monte Blanc, Parker et. al. In this case the Lamy is a Canon QLIII and Monte Blanc would be a Leica

My family moved to Maryland when I was 6, from Rhode Island. It sure seemed South to me!
Class of 62, then you remember the "curious" signs on the water fountains at "The Great Frederick Fair", you can't get more South than that.

That's exactly my point. Crossing from PA into MD was going from one culture to another. It was no different than being in VA or farther South.

I grew up in Doubs - hence my screen name - but it's become so crowded in Frederick County that I couldn't live there now. I still have family and friends in that area but it isn't "home" any longer.

My father used his Leica and other cameras to record daily life there from the late 1930's into the 1990's. That's light years away from today.

How much trouble is it to get to the point where you can access the inside of the casing where the lugs are secured? I have a IIIa that needs to have one of the lugs tightened up.

Jim N.

Not sure Jim, The IIIa may have more screws attaching the camera itself to the casing. Search Rick Oleson's site for details, he shows it all.
Tightening lugs might be difficult though, they are - forgot the word - riveted rather than screwed to the casing. Maybe you can do something with a hardening glue? If you don't, the hole will wear out and the lug will fall off.

How much trouble is it to get to the point where you can access the inside of the casing where the lugs are secured? I have a IIIa that needs to have one of the lugs tightened up. Jim N.

Jim, it's not too difficult. Remove the base plate & take-up spool. Remove the three front screws you'll see in the vulcanite and then the six screws holding the top plate - three front and three back. Remove the slow speed dial and then the underlying plate. Now carefully pull the casing downward to separate it from the top and shutter mechanism. Note the orientation of the bevel on the pressure plate and be sure it goes back together that way.

The lugs are riveted to the body casing so tightening them will require a punch and a form-fitting support for the casing so as not to deform it when you punch the lug. Making a supporting form of hardwood shouldn't be too hard.

Rover, those are the two most common models encountered so you should have no problem finding one.

You may want to look for the IIIf Black Dial or Red Dial or a late IIIc. The early post-war IIIc often suffers from flaking chrome as the materials available to Leitz wasn't as good as pre-war. My 1950 IIIc is unbelieveably smooth but the edges of the base plate have lost a little chrome. I use my Leicas so that's not a problem for me.

Rover, those are the two most common models encountered so you should have no problem finding one.

You may want to look for the IIIf Black Dial or Red Dial or a late IIIc. The early post-war IIIc often suffers from flaking chrome as the materials available to Leitz wasn't as good as pre-war. My 1950 IIIc is unbelieveably smooth but the edges of the base plate have lost a little chrome. I use my Leicas so that's not a problem for me.

Walker

There are quite a few on ebay all the time. I find that they often are not described or demonstrated to my satisfaction, and if they are they sell for "too much," meaning for the same or more than a reputable dealer charges. I will keep my eyes open for a "bargain" for a little while longer, but have seen some that appear nice at some dealers who I trust to give fair assessments of their cameras. I mostly don't want to risk having to send one off for a service if I am paying the same price as I would if buying from a dealer a camera that is clean and working.

If a RFF member had a camera they were selling for a fair price then we could have a win win situation, I would feel good about the condition of the camera that I was buying and getting a "bargain" would not be as important. Unfortunately, you all like your Barnacks (unfortunately for me ).

I probably need to wait a few weeks before I act anyway to keep from getting ahead of my wallet.

Rover, those are the two most common models encountered so you should have no problem finding one.

You may want to look for the IIIf Black Dial or Red Dial or a late IIIc. The early post-war IIIc often suffers from flaking chrome as the materials available to Leitz wasn't as good as pre-war. My 1950 IIIc is unbelieveably smooth but the edges of the base plate have lost a little chrome. I use my Leicas so that's not a problem for me.

My IIIc appears below.

Walker

In the back of my mind something tells me that the IIIc was a single die-cast body and that structurally it is supposed to 'feel' even more solid than the later IIIf for instance. Am I making this up or is really the case (I haven't fondled both models myself so I can't tell).

In the back of my mind something tells me that the IIIc was a single die-cast body and that structurally it is supposed to 'feel' even more solid than the later IIIf for instance. Am I making this up or is really the case (I haven't fondled both models myself so I can't tell).

The single die body casting began with the IIIc making it and all subsequent models stronger than the earlier Leica models I, II, III, and IIIa.

Raid, I can't see the top of your camera due to the lens shade. Does it have a rangefinder? If it does and has a Standard serial number, it would have been converted by the factory into a Model II. My father's IIIa was a Standard that was factory converted but retained the same serial number followed by an asterisk.

Hi, It just so happened that I got curious about using an old Elmar lens and a gentleman on PN had one for sale there, so I bought it. This was followed by an out-of-the-blue pm to me by another gentleman who read here in this website about the possibility that I let my mintish Canon VI-L go, and he sent me a pm offering a trade of some sort. We have until the end of this month to decide whether we both want to finalize the trade or reverse it. Unless I am mistaken, the Elmar also comes from the late 30's or so. Your guess that the two accessory shoes could have been meant for a rangefinder and a viewfinder makes a lot of sense. I have a rangefinder (German) somewhere ...

Walker, The rewind knob comes out for easier rewinding, as you said, and you have the correct serial number. The owner of this camera did not say anything about the camera being custom made, but he told me that the black version is rare to find compared to the chrome version of the Standard.

According to my reference book, the first 5,0000 Standard models were made in black. They ran from serial number 101,001 ~ 106,000 and were from the date beginning 21.10.32 (21 Oct, 1932). I'm not certain how many Standard models were made but after the first run, the majority were made in chrome so black in your serial number range is not common.

The Standard was almost the same as the Leica I, Model C except for the pull-up rewind knob which it shared with the Model II that was the first model with a rangefinder.

Sold as only the body, the black Standard was coded ALVOO and with with the Elmar lens it was coded AROOG. Chrome models were coded ALVOO CHROM and AROOG CHROM.

Except for the Elmar, all of the lenses can be seen in the bottom portion of the main viewfinder. None of them are "bad", can barely be seen. The Canon 50/1.5 blocked less of the VF than any of the first four shown here.

> Sweeney, that's got to be one of the cleanest Barnacks onboard here. Looks great!

This is how it came back from Essex. Before it went up, the RF image was unusable, had one shutter speed, and the chrome was "dingy". I was going to CLA it and sell it. It came back like this, crystal clear viewfinder, perfect split image, and working great. Needless to say I could not sell it!

> Sweeney, that's got to be one of the cleanest Barnacks onboard here. Looks great!

This is how it came back from Essex. Before it went up, the RF image was unusable, had one shutter speed, and the chrome was "dingy". I was going to CLA it and sell it. It came back like this, crystal clear viewfinder, perfect split image, and working great. Needless to say I could not sell it!

I just dressed my IIf in a tight red leather dress but I am not sure. I liked the skin on my M2 better, it was more varied in colour. Both are Aki's wine red snake.
So I will play with het in red and see if love grows. The black beauty spot in place of the slow speed dial causes a voice in my head repeating: black - black - black is the traditional way, keep it like that.
Still, I'm not sure.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.